Steam Greenlight

Help pick new games for Steam

Browse through the entries here and rate up the games you want to see made available via Steam

Submit your product
Nitori-OS Jan 26, 2013 @ 11:41pm
Gameplay before Graphics videos. (First Impressions are everything)
Games are meant to be played, not watched. Too many Green-light projects are posting videos of just their graphics (models, fly-by, environments, etc), and little else. Games are made for their game-play, not their graphics. If I wanted to pay money (or time) for graphics, I'd watch a movie.

Sell your project like you would an advertisement. If you don't have around 5 seconds of game-play in the first 20 seconds of video, it's likely to be rejected. 20 minute videos are nice for in-depth game discussion, but on Green-light I vote on first impressions.

A "jaw-dropping visual experience" may sound amazing, but 12,000 artist renditions of environments and models is just boring. Ever wonder why Indie games with "low graphic content" are surging ahead? It's a balance between graphics and game-play.
Showing 1-15 of 27 comments
< >
Skoardy Jan 27, 2013 @ 3:50am 
Are all these games you're complaining about at a stage where a gameplay video is possible? Not every game on Greenlight is finished when it's submitted so artwork, usually generated long before a game reaches a complete, playable stage, is all they've got to show.
Feraele Jan 27, 2013 @ 5:02am 
to the OP, that is what they are supposed to do. Game videos are fine, if you are an experienced gamer...then that should be sufficient to be able to tell whether that game has any merit or not. It all depends if the developper has money to throw around to produce a demo, which is what I think you are trying to suggest in a round about way, I'm sure they'll do it if they can afford it. Remember that at these early stages of development they don't always have a financial backer so that they can do all these wonderufl things that are on your particular wish list. One more thing..some of these devs DO have a demo, usually can be accessed from the comments area of their thread, and a link to their own website where you can download for free. Some do this, but not all..and I doubt that Steam requires it. These are early stage indie games for the most part...people with ideas and a bit of game footage.

So go easy on them..what has merit will be greenlit, what needs more work, will not get upvoted. There are thousands of gamers who look at these files, so in the long run what is supposed to happen does.
jeslyck Jan 27, 2013 @ 5:29am 
I'm not sure what you are trying to explain?
If it is that they need to show gameplay then the answer is yes!


here's what I do not understand
quote: A "jaw-dropping visual experience" may sound amazing, but 12,000 artist renditions of environments and models is just boring

This is indie 'page you are on, they have no funds for that

quote: Ever wonder why Indie games with "low graphic content" are surging ahead? It's a balance between graphics and game-play.

It is an assumption and there are many reasons if such.
digital purchase,internet spread,access to programs ..........
Last edited by jeslyck; Jan 27, 2013 @ 5:36am
Elizerection Jan 27, 2013 @ 7:07am 
If all you have are flyby clips of things and no gameplay to show then you should be posting in concepts, not Greenlight.
The ranger Jan 27, 2013 @ 10:40am 
@Erinduck: I agree, up and comers are fine in steam, but you need to have even a little gameplay video or a demo to be in Greenlight. Everything else should be in concepts.
Nyaamos Jan 27, 2013 @ 12:22pm 
I also agree with Erinduck that u need to show gameplay in your video. I myself downvote anything that doesnt show atleast a bit of gameplay. And i think lots of ppl do that because its not really capturing ppls interests when u just show flyby clips of 3d models u created.

And after i have downvoted the game i will never look back again for it so its already a vote lost.
See it like this if u post your game so early that u cant even show a tiny glimpse of gameplay to the ppl who watch greenlight in the recent submissions days YOU WILL LOSE alot of votes from ppl who will never come back again.
Τhe Rolling Candy Cane Jan 27, 2013 @ 1:02pm 
Originally posted by Skoardy:
Are all these games you're complaining about at a stage where a gameplay video is possible? Not every game on Greenlight is finished when it's submitted so artwork, usually generated long before a game reaches a complete, playable stage, is all they've got to show.

If you're submitting green-light entries before a game is playable, you're doing it wrong. You should be submitting to concepts instead, or rather not submit at all.
Skoardy Jan 27, 2013 @ 5:23pm 
A game goes through a lot of stages after the concept stage, and long before it reaches a presentable form that most devs would call the best face of the game. Given how judgemental people on Steam are, I'm not surprised a lot of them don't want to show gameplay until it's fully polished. As such, presenting artwork and mocks can be a stop-gap until you're finally ready.

Expecting them to sit in Concepts section with the "I haz horror shooter ideuh!" numpties is just silly.
Τhe Rolling Candy Cane Jan 27, 2013 @ 5:46pm 
Originally posted by Skoardy:
A game goes through a lot of stages after the concept stage, and long before it reaches a presentable form that most devs would call the best face of the game. Given how judgemental people on Steam are, I'm not surprised a lot of them don't want to show gameplay until it's fully polished. As such, presenting artwork and mocks can be a stop-gap until you're finally ready.

Expecting them to sit in Concepts section with the "I haz horror shooter ideuh!" numpties is just silly.

You think it's appropriate for games to appear on greenlight that takes an additional 2-3 years to complete?
Feraele Jan 27, 2013 @ 6:35pm 
Originally posted by The Rolling Cheese:
Originally posted by Skoardy:
A game goes through a lot of stages after the concept stage, and long before it reaches a presentable form that most devs would call the best face of the game. Given how judgemental people on Steam are, I'm not surprised a lot of them don't want to show gameplay until it's fully polished. As such, presenting artwork and mocks can be a stop-gap until you're finally ready.

Expecting them to sit in Concepts section with the "I haz horror shooter ideuh!" numpties is just silly.

You think it's appropriate for games to appear on greenlight that takes an additional 2-3 years to complete?

What's wrong with that? If they get feedback..then they can work on improving or whatever is needed.. I think feedback is also good for letting them know if their game is a good idea. Can always go back and tweak it right?
Τhe Rolling Candy Cane Jan 27, 2013 @ 6:42pm 
Originally posted by Feraele:
Originally posted by The Rolling Cheese:
Originally posted by Skoardy:
A game goes through a lot of stages after the concept stage, and long before it reaches a presentable form that most devs would call the best face of the game. Given how judgemental people on Steam are, I'm not surprised a lot of them don't want to show gameplay until it's fully polished. As such, presenting artwork and mocks can be a stop-gap until you're finally ready.

Expecting them to sit in Concepts section with the "I haz horror shooter ideuh!" numpties is just silly.

You think it's appropriate for games to appear on greenlight that takes an additional 2-3 years to complete?

What's wrong with that? If they get feedback..then they can work on improving or whatever is needed.. I think feedback is also good for letting them know if their game is a good idea. Can always go back and tweak it right?

Except according to you they would have already pass the concept/ideas phase if they are submitting for greenlight.
Skoardy Jan 27, 2013 @ 6:53pm 
Originally posted by The Rolling Cheese:
You think it's appropriate for games to appear on greenlight that takes an additional 2-3 years to complete?
But they won't, they'll only take 4.5 days max to complete! (Like you, I can't in any way back this up with any actual facts, I just really wanted to join in your game of pulling meaningless numbers out of thin air).

And what does your exagerrated timelines even have to do with my comment, anyway? Not wanting to put a gameplay video out until you feel it's polished enough for the knee-jerk critics on Greenlight doesn't in any way mean the game is years away from completion.
Τhe Rolling Candy Cane Jan 27, 2013 @ 6:56pm 
Originally posted by Skoardy:
Originally posted by The Rolling Cheese:
You think it's appropriate for games to appear on greenlight that takes an additional 2-3 years to complete?
But they won't, they'll only take 4.5 days max to complete! (Like you, I can't in any way back this up with any actual facts, I just really wanted to join in your game of pulling meaningless numbers out of thin air).

And what does your exagerrated timelines even have to do with my comment, anyway? Not wanting to put a gameplay video out until you feel it's polished enough for the knee-jerk critics on Greenlight doesn't in any way mean the game is years away from completion.

Right because clearly really good gameplay can totally be done in 4.5 days. Your estimation is horrible.

I quote: How early in development can I post my game?
There are two categories in Steam Greenlight: One for MOSTLY-FINISHED games seeking distribution via Steam and one for early builds and concepts that are simply seeking feedback from the community. You can choose the right category for your title when you post.

I don't know how you measure mostly finished, but when I think of mostly finished I think of video games that actually have gameplay to show.
Last edited by Τhe Rolling Candy Cane; Jan 27, 2013 @ 7:03pm
Skoardy Jan 27, 2013 @ 7:11pm 
Hear that whooshing sound? That's the point going over your head.

It wasn't meant to be a 'good estimation'. That was my point. It was intended to be a silly, pulled-out-of-thin-air number with no basis in fact just to highlight that your '2-3 years' was a similarly worthless, bias guess. So sorry, no, I'm not going to defend a arguement created by your exaggerated, baseless figures.
Τhe Rolling Candy Cane Jan 27, 2013 @ 9:39pm 
Originally posted by Skoardy:
Hear that whooshing sound? That's the point going over your head.

It wasn't meant to be a 'good estimation'. That was my point. It was intended to be a silly, pulled-out-of-thin-air number with no basis in fact just to highlight that your '2-3 years' was a similarly worthless, bias guess. So sorry, no, I'm not going to defend a arguement created by your exaggerated, baseless figures.

Then you have no argument at all :). It's been fun.
Showing 1-15 of 27 comments
< >
Per page: 15 30 50
Date Posted: Jan 26, 2013 @ 11:41pm
Posts: 27